MCHS vs. CN
MCHS (Matthews China Discovery Active ETF) and CN (Xtrackers MSCI All China Equity ETF) are both China Equities funds. MCHS is actively managed, while CN is passively managed. At a 0.19 correlation, their price movements are largely independent. MCHS charges 0.89%/yr vs 0.50%/yr for CN.
Performance
MCHS vs. CN - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
MCHS
- 1D
- 1.99%
- 1M
- 8.90%
- YTD
- 44.06%
- 6M
- 45.71%
- 1Y
- 75.68%
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
CN
- 1D
- —
- 1M
- —
- YTD
- —
- 6M
- —
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
MCHS vs. CN - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | 2024 | |
|---|---|---|---|
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 44.06% | 31.19% | 6.53% |
CN Xtrackers MSCI All China Equity ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 1.55% |
Correlation
The correlation between MCHS and CN is 0.19, which is low. Their price movements are largely independent, making them effective diversification partners.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jan 12, 2024 | 0.19 |
MCHS vs. CN - Sectors Allocation Comparison
Sectors
MCHS
CN
Industrials
Technology
Consumer Cyclical
Basic Materials
Healthcare
Energy
Real Estate
Utilities
Communication Services
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
-
Industrials
MCHS
CN
Technology
MCHS
CN
Consumer Cyclical
MCHS
CN
Basic Materials
MCHS
CN
Healthcare
MCHS
CN
Energy
MCHS
CN
Real Estate
MCHS
CN
Utilities
MCHS
CN
Communication Services
MCHS
CN
Consumer Defensive
MCHS
CN
Financial Services
MCHS
-
CN
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
MCHS vs. CN — Risk / Return Rank
MCHS
CN
MCHS vs. CN - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Matthews China Discovery Active ETF (MCHS) and Xtrackers MSCI All China Equity ETF (CN). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| MCHS | CN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | 3.35 | — | — |
Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | 4.16 | — | — |
Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.56 | — | — |
Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 6.28 | — | — |
Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 19.01 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| MCHS | CN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 3.35 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 1.21 | — | — |
Drawdowns
MCHS vs. CN - Drawdown Comparison
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| MCHS | CN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -23.75% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -12.15% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -3.29% | — | — |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -7.62% | — | — |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 4.01% | — | — |
Volatility
MCHS vs. CN - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| MCHS | CN | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 10.79% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 18.21% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 22.74% | — | — |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 28.26% | — | — |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 28.26% | — | — |
MCHS vs. CN - Expense Ratio Comparison
MCHS has a 0.89% expense ratio, which is higher than CN's 0.50% expense ratio.
Dividends
MCHS vs. CN - Dividend Comparison
MCHS's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.47%, while CN has not paid dividends to shareholders.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CN Xtrackers MSCI All China Equity ETF | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 4.04% | 1.80% | 2.00% | 0.78% | 4.18% | 2.09% | 0.81% | 11.41% | 14.00% |
MCHS Matthews China Discovery Active ETF | 2.47% | 3.56% | 5.48% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
Frequently Asked Questions
MCHS and CN have a correlation of 0.19, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
On fees, CN is cheaper at 0.50% per year. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
CN is cheaper with a 0.50% expense ratio, compared with 0.89% for MCHS.
MCHS has the higher dividend yield at 2.47%, compared with 0.00% for CN.
They also come from different issuers: Matthews and Deutsche Bank. Their fees differ too: 0.89% for MCHS and 0.50% for CN.
Find the right allocation for MCHS and CN
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer